There's no question about it: Movie sequels have proved the age-old adage that it is possible to have too much of a good thing.'' But before we dare to bash every cinematic, "annoying little brother" let's take a moment to remember the few, arguable "greats."

Tremors 2, for instance, completely overshadowed its predecessor. Teminator 2 was doubtlessly well produced with a spotless plot. The Empire Strikes Back was a little dark and morbid compared with its two companions but still a classic. Mission Impossible 2, Jaws 2, Gremlins 2, Batman 2, Star Trek 2. Isn't there some kind of rule about every other prime-numbered sequel being halfway decent? If you want to read more about specific films, you can view a list of 320 sequels at www.route21.com/sequels/ sequels.html

But why did these movies make it while others like Lost World, Blues Brothers 2000, Escape from LA, and Home Alone 2 became stomping grounds for water cooler ridicule? The best way to discern a sequel with star ability from one that is fated to crash and burn, may be to talk with the experts.

Annie Przonek, a movie critic on Rave staff, explains what makes a sequel soar or sink. "Sequels only work if the first movie [is] written with a sequel in mind. [With some] movies like the sequel to Jurassic Park, the producers just thought, `you know, we made a lot of money off this movie. And even though there's little to base a sequel on, let's make another because we could make a whole lot more money.' I'm not a big fan of the sequel. They're usually really weakly written and delivered."

While movie critics certainly have a notable perspective on films, it's also important to take a look at what pleases general audiences.

Mario Colli, a junior at Dr. Phillips High, says, "A good sequel is made with a balance of new ideas and old continuity." Michael Geniac, also a junior at Dr. Phillips, remarks, "Sequels shouldn't be made to make money or contribute to teeny-bopper magazines. They should contribute to the story and the story only." Jenn Nix, another jnior, adds to these requirements: "Sequels are good only when they don't rely on special effects and big name actors."

Sequels, prequels, trilogies and the like have left the movie theaters and have begun to monopolize the whole entertainment industry. The story no longer stops on the silver screen -- companies like Disney have found it extremely profitable to offer bits and pieces of continuation in other forms of entertainment. Many of Disney's animated features are continued on video. For years the company has been making books, music and TV programs with familiar characters and new plots. Now they have even begun to shuttle their tales onto Broadway where they flourish and profit tenfold.

But Disney is by no means the only company profiting from sequels. Universal Studios offers the sequels as an experience you can explore yourself. Attractions at its theme parks like "Men in Black," "ET," and "Jaws" just bring the movies to life.

Sequels are a risky thing. When properly constructed they may earn both fame and fortune, but the formation of such films is critical. If not done carefully, a sequel has the ability to not only be a major waste of time but also form a sour aftertaste in the wake of cinematic glory.